Gun Protesters Plan March On D.C. With Loaded Rifles To ‘Put Government On Notice'

[Missourian]

I found the legislation last night...open carry of a long gun IS legal in the District of Columbia IF AND ONLY IF the "Possessor has a registration certificate for the firearm; D.C. Code § 7-2502.01" ...LINK.


Here is the statute:

It is illegal to possess or sell a firearm in the Washington, DC without a valid registration certificate. The penalty for violating this section is a maximum fine of $1000 and/or a maximum of one year imprisonment. It is a valid defense that the person temporarily possessed the firearm to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to someone. D.C. Criminal Code 7-2502.01...LINK

Also:

It is illegal to possess ammunition in the District of Columbia unless the person is: (1) a licensed dealer, (2) a federal or city law enforcement officer acting within scope of duties, or (3) holder of a valid registration certificate of same gauge and caliber as ammunition in possession. It is also illegal to possess, sell or transfer any “large capacity ammunition feeding device.” A person guilty of this charge can be sentenced to a maximum fine of $1000 and/or up to a year imprisonment. D.C. Criminal Code 7-2506.01...LINK

FWIW.

 

[buckeye45_73]

can they march to the IRS building, and put them on "notice"?

 

[buckeye45_73]

I still don't believe these 2nd Amendment nutters have the balls to do it.

oh they do, DC cant do a dam thing about it....the Supreme Court said so

 

[Vandalshandle]

i sure hope that I don't miss the start of the armed insurrection, since I doubt if it would last more than about 3 1/2 minutes...

However, I can't help but wish that they would march on the lower 9th Ward in New Orleans. THAT could turn into a replay of the Warsaw uprising of WW2!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[tyroneweaver]

By Rebecca Leber

Almost 900 people are RSVPed for a July 4th march on Washington, D.C. where protesters plan to carry loaded rifles. In D.C., openly carrying guns is against the law. But the organizer of the event, libertarian radio host Adam Kokesh, says the march is an act of “civil disobedience” that attempts to prove gun advocates’ point in the “SUBTLEST way possible.”

The event’s Facebook invitation describes the march as a nonviolent demonstration, “unless the government chooses to make it violent”:

This is an act of civil disobedience, not a permitted event. We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free.

There’s a remote chance that there will be violence as there has been from government before, and I think it should be clear that if anyone involved in this event is approached respectfully by agents of the state, they will submit to arrest without resisting. We are truly saying in the SUBTLEST way possible that we would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.​

More: Gun Protesters Plan March On Washington With Loaded Rifles To 'Put The Government On Notice'

I'm sure Obama will have an adequate military/police force waiting for these radical gun clowns. When I think of "civil disobedience" - I think of brave unarmed civil rights heroes like Martin Luther King, Jr. and Ghandi.

when the Lakhota tribes defeated Custer at little Big Horn, the Lakhota's had repeating rifles;Custer didn't.

 

[Katzndogz]

It 's from Think Progress. It looks more and more like a TP fake up job. When nothing happens because it was never going to happen outside of Soros' mind liberals will claim they scared off the gun owners.

 

[Cuyo]

I still don't believe these 2nd Amendment nutters have the balls to do it.

oh they do, DC cant do a dam thing about it....the Supreme Court said so

Oh did they! Be sure to have your contemporaries... Including [MENTION=42689]The2ndAmendment[/MENTION] explain that to to police while they're sitting in the cooler, while the local and federal authorities argue the charges and jurisdiction on the matter.

God, nobody can be as dumb as you people are...

 

[tyroneweaver]

I still don't believe these 2nd Amendment nutters have the balls to do it.

take away the indian sty-pen and see what would happen

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I still don't believe these 2nd Amendment nutters have the balls to do it.

oh they do, DC cant do a dam thing about it....the Supreme Court said so

Wrong.

The Supreme Court has made no ruling on the Constitutionality of laws prohibiting the open carrying of loaded firearms.

 

[S.J.]

I still don't believe these 2nd Amendment nutters have the balls to do it.

oh they do, DC cant do a dam thing about it....the Supreme Court said so

Wrong.

The Supreme Court has made no ruling on the Constitutionality of laws prohibiting the open carrying of loaded firearms.

Read the second amendment. Until it's challenged, it's the law of the land.

 

[lukelk]

oh they do, DC cant do a dam thing about it....the Supreme Court said so

Wrong.

The Supreme Court has made no ruling on the Constitutionality of laws prohibiting the open carrying of loaded firearms.

Read the second amendment. Until it's challenged, it's the law of the land.

you are right, we have the right to regulate fire arms, or if you want to put it into 1791 context we have the right to form well regulated militias, you dumb gun nazi. I guess it fits your a fight wing nut job.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Wrong.

The Supreme Court has made no ruling on the Constitutionality of laws prohibiting the open carrying of loaded firearms.

Read the second amendment. Until it's challenged, it's the law of the land.

you are right, we have the right to regulate fire arms, or if you want to put it into 1791 context we have the right to form well regulated militias, you dumb gun nazi. I guess it fits your a fight wing nut job.

what

it is the "right of the people" to Keep and bear arms

 

[lukelk]

Read the second amendment. Until it's challenged, it's the law of the land.

you are right, we have the right to regulate fire arms, or if you want to put it into 1791 context we have the right to form well regulated militias, you dumb gun nazi. I guess it fits your a fight wing nut job.

what

it is the "right of the people" to Keep and bear arms

clearly you don't understand text that was used in 1791, sure you can carry a musket around, if you wish, but that should be regulated too.

 

[S.J.]

Wrong.

The Supreme Court has made no ruling on the Constitutionality of laws prohibiting the open carrying of loaded firearms.

Read the second amendment. Until it's challenged, it's the law of the land.

you are right, we have the right to regulate fire arms, or if you want to put it into 1791 context we have the right to form well regulated militias, you dumb gun nazi. I guess it fits your a fight wing nut job.

I don't take seriously somebody whose response to someone is "stick your finger up your ass". If that's the best you've got, you're not worth engaging in any sort of exchange.

 

[lukelk]

Read the second amendment. Until it's challenged, it's the law of the land.

you are right, we have the right to regulate fire arms, or if you want to put it into 1791 context we have the right to form well regulated militias, you dumb gun nazi. I guess it fits your a fight wing nut job.

I don't take seriously somebody whose response to someone is "stick your finger up your ass". If that's the best you've got, you're not worth engaging in any sort of exchange.

I don't take anyone seriously who thinks having guns to overthrow the government is worth listning to either, or someone who thinks every tom dick and harry should be able to own a gun.

simple regulations. back round checks. limited ammo clips. close gun show/private sale loopholes, access too different types of ammo. you my friend are a right wing nazi.......

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

oh they do, DC cant do a dam thing about it....the Supreme Court said so

Wrong.

The Supreme Court has made no ruling on the Constitutionality of laws prohibiting the open carrying of loaded firearms.

Read the second amendment. Until it's challenged, it's the law of the land.

Read the Second Amendment’s case law, that’s the law of the land.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Read the second amendment. Until it's challenged, it's the law of the land.

you are right, we have the right to regulate fire arms, or if you want to put it into 1791 context we have the right to form well regulated militias, you dumb gun nazi. I guess it fits your a fight wing nut job.

what

it is the "right of the people" to Keep and bear arms

And as the Heller Court reaffirmed: no right is absolute, and all rights are subject to reasonable restrictions, including the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment.

Laws prohibiting OC of loaded firearms are Constitutional until a court rules otherwise.

 

[jon_berzerk]

you are right, we have the right to regulate fire arms, or if you want to put it into 1791 context we have the right to form well regulated militias, you dumb gun nazi. I guess it fits your a fight wing nut job.

what

it is the "right of the people" to Keep and bear arms

clearly you don't understand text that was used in 1791, sure you can carry a musket around, if you wish, but that should be regulated too.

"the right of the people" to keep and bear arms does not get much simpler then that

not so fast if they intended that

they would have said so

like

the right to carry a musket except the girandoni rifle

 

[S.J.]

you are right, we have the right to regulate fire arms, or if you want to put it into 1791 context we have the right to form well regulated militias, you dumb gun nazi. I guess it fits your a fight wing nut job.

I don't take seriously somebody whose response to someone is "stick your finger up your ass". If that's the best you've got, you're not worth engaging in any sort of exchange.

I don't take anyone seriously who thinks having guns to overthrow the government is worth listning to either, or someone who thinks every tom dick and harry should be able to own a gun.

simple regulations. back round checks. limited ammo clips. close gun show/private sale loopholes, access too different types of ammo. you my friend are a right wing nazi.......

Not only do you give adolescent responses, your spelling and grammar are atrocious. You post like a third grade dropout. Ever hear of capital letters, and the difference between "two, to, and too"? And what the fuck is a "back round check"? Where were you educated, reform school?

 

[jon_berzerk]

you are right, we have the right to regulate fire arms, or if you want to put it into 1791 context we have the right to form well regulated militias, you dumb gun nazi. I guess it fits your a fight wing nut job.

what

it is the "right of the people" to Keep and bear arms

And as the Heller Court reaffirmed: no right is absolute, and all rights are subject to reasonable restrictions, including the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment.

Laws prohibiting OC of loaded firearms are Constitutional until a court rules otherwise.

they have to offer one or the other or both